Why keep squabbling over issues that cannot be resolved except by the Tyranny of the
Manipulated Majority? Decentralize, diffuse and devolve power to the lowest level and the
national dead-ends vanish. Natural selection will sort out what works and what doesn't.

The concentration of power into the hands of a few bureaucrats in Europe has failed,
just as concentrating monetary power into the (privately owned) hands of Federal Reserve
bureaucrats has failed. Enabled by a captured Central State, financial power has become
concentrated in five banks, media control has been concentrated into six corporations, and so
on, ad nauseum.

Concentrating centralized political power inevitably spawns State/private-capital
cartels that stripmine taxpayer/citizens. This cannot be avoided or staved off with
1,000-page legislative bills and 30,000 pages of regulations, all of which serve to
consolidate the power of centralized government and private capital.

The Argument Industry (May 25, 2012) is a symptom of what I term
profound political disunity. (If I didn't coin the phrase, I am the predominant user
of it in recent history.) This
is a key concept in my books Survival+ and Resistance, Revolution, Liberation, for it underpins our inability
to address, much less solve, the over-arching problems of our society and economy.

Yes, arguing fruitlessly without hope of resolution is a profitable "make-work" business,
but it has a debilitating effect in the real world: views get hardened by propaganda
into rigid ideological silos, and fractured institutions are slowly delegitimized.

Take gay marriage as an example. Does anyone seriously think there will ever be
some sort of national consensus on this issue? Why does anyone think there *should* be
a national consensus that is politically imposed on the minority who disagree?

My friend Richard Metzger of Dangerous Minds recently summarized the "devolution solution"--devolve
power to the states:

They want to force their way of life on everyone else, we think
they're idiots, etc, etc. and n'er the twain shall meet. EVER.

So why try to force the fit if it doesn't work anymore? Let Arizona do
whatever it wants. Or Wisconsin, Or Florida.

Let North Carolina ban gay marriage... but let the gays in NC pick up the hint and
move to more hospitable climes and so forth for other groups and
individuals who would not be able to get along in a situation whereby
the DOMINANT paradigm of a particular region would be allowed
to have free rein.

But let the rest of us do what we want to do and we'll KEEP our
tax dollars *where we live*, thank you very much!

Not only do I totally agree, but I would devolve power even lower down the ecosystem
to counties. Let me first stipulate that I have consistently held that there is
an essential role for a strong but limited Central State: it must have the
power to disrupt and dismantle local monopolies, oligarchies and criminal organizations,
and it must retain the power to guarantee freedom of faith, exchange, movement, expression,
enterprise and association to all individuals. It must also be empowered to defend the nation
against external threats and attack, and protect the nation's "commons"--its soil, water, air,
natural beauty and resources--from despoilation and exploitation by global, national or
local Elites.

But beyond these limited roles, all other power should be diffused and decentralized to
the lowest units of local political power, the counties. If County A legalizes gay marriage,
County B bans it and County C decides that marriage is a private affair that the government
should have no role in, then people who have concluded this is a key issue will migrate to the county
of their choice. (County D may choose by not choosing to enable an "Argument Industry"
that endlessly gnaws over the same old tired ideological debates as part of the local
"entertainment industry.")

There is a decidedly favorable element of natural selection to this process of letting
local communities choose their own machinery of governance. With no Savior State
to skim money from one community to give to another out of political favoritism, local
communities will have to tax themselves for whatever services they desire.

If productive people are being taxed into penury and receiving little in the way of
services they desire, they will move to a county with more favorable policies. Corrupt
kleptocracies will be abandoned until there are no productive people left to exploit,
and the kleptocracy will implode.

Each county will be an experiment on what works and doesn't work, and it is likely there
will be a spectrum of successful models. Those counties which allow concentrations of power
to infect and control their social and financial ecosystems will likely stagnate;
those which incentivize freeloading will be overwhelmed with freeloaders, and so on. Risk
and consequence will be reunited, as they are in Nature.

If County E decides that all CEOs of banks chartered to do business in the county must
live in the county, then business/finance will adjust to that political will. As noted
yesterday, If 500 banks are forced to compete in a transparent marketplace, it will
be very difficult for those corporations to purchase the political power the five
"too big to fail" Central State-created banks now own.

Is local control
of the way of life "efficient"? Perhaps efficiency's elevation to godlike status is
as misplaced as confusing convenience with meaning. What "works" for some communities
is not just what's cheapest in terms of consumerism. "Efficiency" is often corporate-speak for
a second-order tyranny.

We are like passengers on the Titanic ten minutes after its fatal encounter with the iceberg: though our financial system seems unsinkable, its reliance on debt and financialization has already doomed it.

We cannot know when the Central State and financial system will destabilize, we only know they will destabilize. We cannot know which of the State’s fast-rising debts and obligations will be renounced; we only know they will be renounced in one fashion or another.

The process of the unsustainable collapsing and a new, more sustainable model emerging is called revolution, and it combines cultural, technological, financial and political elements in a dynamic flux.

History is not fixed; it is in our hands. We cannot await a remote future transition
to transform our lives. Revolution begins with our internal understanding and reaches fruition in our coherently directed daily actions in the lived-in world.

"This guy is THE leading visionary on reality.
He routinely discusses things which no one else has talked about, yet,
turn out to be quite relevant months later."
--Walt Howard, commenting about CHS on another blog.

NOTE: gifts/contributions are acknowledged in the order received. Your name and email
remain confidential and will not be given to any other individual, company or agency.

I would be honored if you linked this essay to your site, or printed a copy for your own use.

Terms of Service:
All content on this blog is provided by Trewe LLC for informational purposes only. The owner of this
blog makes no representations as to the accuracy or completeness of any information
on this site or found by following any link on this site. The owner will not be liable
for any errors or omissions in this information nor for the availability of this information.
The owner will not be liable for any losses, injuries, or damages from the display or
use of this information. These terms and conditions of use are subject to change at
anytime and without notice.

Making your Amazon purchases
through this Search Box helps support oftwominds.com
at no cost to you: